JUDGMENT : 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. Impugned order dated 08.02.2017 has dismissed an application filed by the appellant praying for setting aside of the ex parte decree of divorce dated 16.10.2015. 3. The petition for divorce filed by the respondent was listed before the Court on 28.05.2015. Notice was issued by registered post only returnable for 13.07.2015. On the basis of the report of the postman that the appellant had refused to accept the notice it was ordered on 13.07.2015 that the appellant shall be proceeded against ex parte. 4. As per the appellant, she learnt about the decree when the respondent presented the decree of divorce in the proceedings which she had initiated under the Domestic Violence Act. 5. The impugned order treats the report of the postman to be true. The impugned order overlooks the fact that on oath the appellant had denied to refuse the notice sent by the Court through registered post on the plea that it was never tendered to her. 6. Without examining the postman the learned Judge, Family Court could not have decided the application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC filed by the appellant. Besides, the learned Judge also had to consider whether simply sending notice by registered post was enough. Did the law require the notice to be sent through Process Server as well. 7. Thus, the appeal is allowed. Order dated 08.02.2017 is set aside. The application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC is restored for fresh adjudication with a direction that the postman concerned would be examined and thereafter the application would be decided afresh.